Breaking the chains, winning the games, and saving Western Civilization.

Wednesday, February 8, 2017

Can confirm

Double E attempts to explain the Sigma mindset:

A lot of people reading Vox project. They just don't understand sigmas. So when they see something he's written, they tend to assume he is speaking from the 'normal' emotional position that they and most others would have to be in to make a similar statement. Most people would have to be feeling fairly strong emotions to openly tell somebody "I don't care what you think". And so they assume Vox is doing the same thing. "oh look hes being defensive." or "that comment must have really got to him"

No. He just ACTUALLY doesn't care what the guy thinks. He isn't stewing over this conversation for the next few hours, or thinking about what would have been the sickest burn - he isn't thinking about it at all.

So also, his insights into the emotions of the poster aren't an attempt to attack the guy, or get him to do or feel anything. Its not about him. Vox doesn't care about him. It's much more closer to an alien being like "hmm this insect flies in circles when I pull off one wing. Interesting." **writes in notebook**

Meanwhile the bug is shrieking about how cruel, and mad, or triggered this alien must be to do such a thing.

This is correct. Sigmas are not some sort of Vulcan or anything. I definitely have emotions, and they are certainly aroused in situations like the one described yesterday. But they are seldom the emotions that Gammas or others tend to assume they are. I have very little interest in what most people think, in part because I can very often anticipate how they will react to a given situation on the basis of their identity, intelligence, and socio-sexual rank.

I felt precisely one emotion when several people started criticizing the cover of the new Wright novel, offering unrequested advice, and suggesting unnecessary debate: annoyance. However, that's as far as it went.

And it is the very dispassionate observation he describes that often allows me to quickly, and correctly, determine the sort of individual with whom I am dealing, even on the basis of a single statement or comment. For someone who strongly prefers to stay well outside most groups and their social hierarchies it is very useful to be able to not only understand, but anticipate, the probable consequences of the group dynamics.

I am naturally a very empathetic person. I care about people, even stupid people. I'm not inclined to tell someone, "I don't care what you think." What I am inclined to do is to tell someone flat out to their face that I think what they just said is extremely stupid and makes them look like an assklown and a shit brain. I'll tell someone that their blitheringly idiotic statement is not persuasive and is not going to even provoke serious thought much less change my mind. Then I would invite them to try again, perhaps after they have apprehended some facts and given the issue in question some actual thought. But now I understand that when they express their inevitable outrage and anger at being called an idiot to their face, I can Sigma-Splain to them that I only called their unfactual and illogical statements stupid, and that I had confidence that if they put their mind to it they could be as smart as anyone else, even me. I'll tell them that my method for ascertaining what is most likely the truth is to gather the available and relevant facts, cogitate on them with logic and reason, then mediate upon them so as to avoid jumping to conclusions, and most importantly to repeat the process several times before even attempting to draw any solid conclusions. This is what we do when time permits. Sometimes urgent necessity does not allow for such investigations beforehand, so in that case we make the best snap decision we can but then afterwards we analyze what occurred assuming we survive our snap decisions.

Right. The Sigma doesn't say "I don't care what you think" because he's trying to hurt the other person's feelings, or because he wants to put the other person down, or because he wants to help or correct the other person. He's saying exactly what his position is, which is exactly what the words are:

"I don't care what you think."

The Gamma reads "I don't care what you think" as

"I care what you think and my statement is an invitation to you to explain your position further so we can hash out what to do"

or "I am interested in your position"

or "You hurt my feelings, you asshole."

When it is none of those things. It really is "I don't care what you think".

Most people read this as something other than what it is because most people don't speak this way. I mean, no one's that big of a dick, right? Especially gammas don't read it literally, because gammas are ALWAYS looking for the "hidden meaning" and the "code".

I maintain that most of the aspects of Sigma Vox describes are unique to an INTJ sigma.

An INTJ's brain is wired for systems and perspectives. No one is better at building, understanding, and forseeing the outcome of any system. Roughly speaking they are meta-thinkers. They think about thinking, and in the process they learn how thinking works. They gather people's perspectives through reading and social situations, and eventuallyreach the point where they can see how someone is going to act in most situations. The highest compliment anyone can get from an INTJ is "I've never thought of that".

The aspect of this talent that relates to the Sigma classification, is that it is introverted and independent.An INTJs internal map, and all the systems of understanding and execution, feels more real to the INTJ than anything else. Anything that is a candidate for inclusion on that map is quickly assessed and rejeected, mostly because the INTJ has encountered it before and it offers nothing novel. The hostility to other's, usually poorly considered opinions, comes from the cognitive energy cost of modifying the map to include, not that person's opinion, but the entire person. The INTJ's internal system has to take the person's stupidity and issues intoaccount before the person can be included. So the INTJ vets every person for inclusion on the list. Most people are simply not worth the time so they experience hostility. And nobody expresses more aggressive hostility than a Sigma.

I am not a Sigma but I certainly relate. However as an ISTP (think every silent action movie protagonist ever), my indifference is to social cues and unspoken social contracts. I see them as a burden and I seek out any situation where I am free to act as quickly and accurately as possible. In movies you'll see this as the hero ignoring all the rules in order to get the job done. Point being that indifference as an introverted trait will be expressed differentlybased on type, but no one will express it as aggressively as a Sigma.

It's much more closer to an alien being like "hmm this insect flies in circles when I pull off one wing. Interesting." **writes in notebook**

Yeah, that's something like how I learned about other human beings' emotions and how they work.

@Jack RagnarI think that Sigmas tend toward INTJ but that it's still possible for there to be INTJ Alphas. You don't need to be a flashy extrovert to lead an army, even if it might help. (For that matter, I don't recall VD ever saying he is or isn't INTJ himself.)

And of course, there can be INTJ Gammas which are, I imagine, the most likely Gammas to think they're Sigmas.

I myself am apparently an INTJ, although I didn't know that until a few minutes ago when I looked up what these personality acronyms meant and took an online quiz at 16personalities.com.

Anything that is a candidate for inclusion on that map is quickly assessed and rejeected, mostly because the INTJ has encountered it before and it offers nothing novel. The hostility to other's, usually poorly considered opinions, comes from the cognitive energy cost of modifying the map to include, not that person's opinion, but the entire person.

I wouldn't say that. I think more along the lines of, "this fellow is messed up due to Gamma thought patterns/attitudes and/or progtard beliefs and I just don't want to deal with him until and unless he fixes himself because I know he'll be nothing but trouble otherwise".

I don't normally tell people "I don't care", I just walk off and do what I want. If I do care, it is because they can interfere with my actions or I will damage a relationship I want to keep. I figured this is because I am the youngest of a lot of children. I learned long ago it takes way too much time to explain to my siblings why I'm not going to do what they suggest. It just causes a fight if I say "I don't care." Why waste time with that when I can just go take care of business?

But I never understood why it caused a fight. It is obvious to me that 95% of the time these people don't care what I think. They might care about what I say or do, but they don't give a crap about my thoughts. So why so prickly?

I never considered it from the position of what would they have to be feeling/thinking to walk off the way I do.

"I don't care what you think" because he's trying to hurt the other person's feelings, or because he wants to put the other person down, or because he wants to help or correct the other person. He's saying exactly what his position is, which is exactly what the words are: "

A trait that is a rare commodity these days. We are a society filled with lies...much of it masked with "niceness". We are conditioned since birth to be " nice" . Ultimately you end up with a world filled with posers walking around with saccharin smiles who live in fear of offending.When you do speak the truth and mean what you say the herd considers you a blunt "asshole".But such is the badge of honor that straight talkers wear.

It's not that some Sigmas don't "care" how other people think and feel but rather don't want to be annoyed and bothered with people's drama, trouble and "inconveniences" beyond the "I don't care" statement Sigmas say.

"I think that Sigmas tend toward INTJ but that it's still possible for there to be INTJ Alphas. You don't need to be a flashy extrovert to lead an army, even if it might help. (For that matter, I don't recall VD ever saying he is or isn't INTJ himself.)

And of course, there can be INTJ Gammas which are, I imagine, the most likely Gammas to think they're Sigmas."

Yo VFM I used to think similarly but found out and have to come with personal acceptance of the fact that there are NO "introverted Alphas" in human social reality brother.

INTJ personality types are natural-born independent LEADERS who may or may not choose to lead but the main distinction is that INTJ has the capability to lead. INTJ "Gamma" (or Omega) most likely does not; hence INTJ Sigma, INTJ Beta, INTJ Delta can LEAD if they must.

The human (male) socio-sexual hierarchy Vox has refined is 100% accurate in the real world experience. My hat's off to Mr. Vox, couldn't understand the human social hierarchy as accurately as I do now since discovering his informative blog/website "Alpha Game". Makes complete sense when "applied".

Hate to break it cuz I think it would be cool but "Introverted human Alpha male" does NOT exist in real world nature (if you want my honest answer). Haven't seen it before. HOWEVER, if by "introverted (INTJ) Alpha" you mean "Sigma" then "Sigma rank" is what would be properly "typed" as "introverted Alpha" that a lot of people want to think is such a thing as "introverted Alpha".

Seen this up close and personal in many real life personal experiences; observing famous celebrity social interactions on TV, interviews and talk shows. Also observing ordinary people in everyday life who fit the descriptions. Yeah, yeah. Also did a high school senior project on "personality types" that would refer these whole observations.

Hmmm... Interesting stuff.

(P.S. Now "Gammas" from the "gammas" I've personally encountered in real life I've seen the ENTP, ENFP, INTP personality type gammas around most frequently but not any "INTJ type gammas" but I think it's still physiologically possible for INTJs to be Gammas just not many though for the most part on the spectrum. Many "nerdy" INTJ personality types are often low Deltas with emphasized "Gammaness" lol in their personality behaviours though. I personally perceive the NT and NF personality temperament to be a common denominator among "Gamma-kind". Haven't seen "sensory type" gammas like SPs or SJs (imagine that!); really thinking the NT and NF physiological temperaments being the "personality type boundaries" on the "Gamma category". Delta men on the other hand comprise all 16 personality types of the human male socio-sexual hierarchy. Alpha and Sigma is exclusively extravert [Alpha] and introvert [Sigma]. I also think "Omega rank" is exclusively "introvert" or "introverted" for the most part. Don't know any "extraverted Omegas" out there lol but it may be...)

Daniel - yup. Discussions around INTJs are very funny. A lot of people mistype themselves, especially on this one (speaking as an INTJ, who thought he was an ISTP, who had to be argued into actually reading a book on the subject, understanding what the functions meant and how they reacted, and finally accepting his typing). This description as coming off cold and detached stems more from ISTPs and INTPs who mistype themselves as INTJ - same with describing them as "systems thinkers". System thinking is an introverted-logic function, whereas INTJs have extraverted-logic - they care about things being well-ordered and understood, but only in a pragmatic sense, only insofar as it serves their purpose. It is then junked, or stored away, and *that* is where it gets treated internally, by their Intuition, and played with and plugged into other things and turned upside down.

And it's precisely that behaviour which I think makes INTJs more "quirky" in their behaviour, where INTPs and ISTPs can be straight-up deadpan and reserved. All three are lost in something, but the INTJ is lost in a dream, the INTP is lost in a puzzle, and the ISTP is lost in whatever they're doing.

(The above was directed at Jack, although re-reading what he said a few times now, I actually got distracted by a few words and didn't actually read what he was saying originally - I agree with what he says there actually.)

That's interesting... although Gammas sure appear to be more widespread than that given how often they show up on VD's blogs. I would expect all the "F" types (the Feelers) to have Gammas, for obvious reasons. Maybe some types don't make their Gammatude obvious in public so you don't notice them?

Many "nerdy" INTJ personality types are often low Deltas with emphasized "Gammaness" lol in their personality behaviours though.

Haven't seen "sensory type" gammas like SPs or SJs (imagine that!); really thinking the NT and NF physiological temperaments being the "personality type boundaries" on the "Gamma category".

@Jed MaskThat actually makes sense, if (assuming I'm understanding things correctly) "S" types base their attitude on how things actually are whereas "N" types on how they wish things could be. As we know, Gammas deny reality, even when it's staring them in the face, so I could see Gammas and "S" types as diametrically opposed in a sense.

Gamma's are secret kingdom "kings" who hate themselves for everything..and argue over anything..and hate hate hate being abandoned or ignored. The upfront part can seem Alpha..seem..turbulence..they crack and hide.

Sigma's greatest value (and pitfall) is competent indifference. Whatever..the frame does not change. One winged fly, so and so is butt hurt..whatever, have better things to do. The real insight would be..no one knows what that next thing will be..only the Sigma b/c..self absorbed and we all do get rained on